Gee! I’ll try to act grown up and real....
I’m not an attorney so take my comments with a grain of salt.
In our CHL class we teach students NEVER shoot to kill. You shoot to
stop and/or neutralize the threat. Once the threat is neutralized (for
example the burglar is “down”) there is no justification for deadly force.
If you shoot a non-threat you can be charged with murder.
-------
There are many factors to consider. Even in Texas, there would be a big
difference between shooting a burglar in Bexar County (San Antonio) and
Comal County (where I live). We are a suburban/rural county, provincial
in our politics and believers in “a man’s home is his castle”.
If I use deadly force to neutralize a burglar, my first priority is the safety
and welfare of my family and (if any) guests. Mr. BG comes in third (at
best).
Yes, of course we’d call 9-1-1 immediately - but I’m going to be sure Mr.
BG is no longer a threat. If he’s wounded, I’ll hold him at gunpoint. If
he’s dead I’ll still watch him. I’ll take care of the more seriously
wounded people first - with priority given to the folks legally in my home.
I’m an EMT. I’ve been trained in a method of triage which I would
employ. If my daughter has a sliver and the BG is bleeding to death, I’d
probably help the BG if I thought it was safe to do so. Otherwise, tough
luck, BG, you picked the wrong home.
-----
If I were downtown at night (theatre, etc.) and we’re attacked by a gang,
my first priority is the welfare of myself and my party. I’ll call 9-1-1
once the Good Guys are safe - Mr. BG will just have to wait.
Sigh! So many scenarios; so little time.
-----
By the way, according to the National Safety Council, only Vermont has
written law requiring off-duty healthcare workers to provide care in case
of emergencies. If we have any obligation at all, it usually is limited to
calling 9-1-1 or otherwise trying to obtain aid.
I’m not an attorney so take my comments with a grain of salt.
In our CHL class we teach students NEVER shoot to kill. You shoot to
stop and/or neutralize the threat. Once the threat is neutralized (for
example the burglar is “down”) there is no justification for deadly force.
If you shoot a non-threat you can be charged with murder.
-------
There are many factors to consider. Even in Texas, there would be a big
difference between shooting a burglar in Bexar County (San Antonio) and
Comal County (where I live). We are a suburban/rural county, provincial
in our politics and believers in “a man’s home is his castle”.
If I use deadly force to neutralize a burglar, my first priority is the safety
and welfare of my family and (if any) guests. Mr. BG comes in third (at
best).
Yes, of course we’d call 9-1-1 immediately - but I’m going to be sure Mr.
BG is no longer a threat. If he’s wounded, I’ll hold him at gunpoint. If
he’s dead I’ll still watch him. I’ll take care of the more seriously
wounded people first - with priority given to the folks legally in my home.
I’m an EMT. I’ve been trained in a method of triage which I would
employ. If my daughter has a sliver and the BG is bleeding to death, I’d
probably help the BG if I thought it was safe to do so. Otherwise, tough
luck, BG, you picked the wrong home.
-----
If I were downtown at night (theatre, etc.) and we’re attacked by a gang,
my first priority is the welfare of myself and my party. I’ll call 9-1-1
once the Good Guys are safe - Mr. BG will just have to wait.
Sigh! So many scenarios; so little time.
-----
By the way, according to the National Safety Council, only Vermont has
written law requiring off-duty healthcare workers to provide care in case
of emergencies. If we have any obligation at all, it usually is limited to
calling 9-1-1 or otherwise trying to obtain aid.